Posts

§318 Estate Beneficiary Definition | US International Tax Law Firm

/in , /by

The Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) §318 contains corporate stock attribution rules between an estate and its beneficiaries. In order to apply these rules correctly, one must understand how §318 defines “beneficiary” for the purposes of upstream and downstream estate attribution rules. This articles will introduce the readers to this §318 estate beneficiary definition.

§318 Estate Beneficiary Definition: General Rule

Treas. Regs. §1.318-3(a) defines “beneficiary” for the purposes of §318 attribution rules (on a separate note, pursuant to Rev. Rul. 71-353, the attribution rules for the personal holding company provisions, collapsible corporation provisions (now repealed), and affiliated group provisions also use this definition of a beneficiary).

Treas. Regs. §1.318-3(a) states that “the term beneficiary includes any person entitled to receive property of a decedent pursuant to a will or pursuant to laws of descent and distribution.” Hence, in order to be considered a beneficiary under §318 , a person must have a direct present interest in the property of the estate or in income generated by that property.

Moreover, a person entitled to property not subject to administration by the executor is not a beneficiary for purposes of the §318 estate attribution rules unless the property is subject to the executor’s claim for a share of the federal estate tax.

§318 Estate Beneficiary Definition: Certain Specific Cases

This definition of beneficiary produces interesting results in some specific cases which are actually quite common.

Let’s first see the result of the application of the §318 estate beneficiary definition to life estates. A person with a life estate in estate property is a beneficiary. On the other hand, if a person owns only a remainder interest (i.e. an interest that vests only after the death of the life tenant), then he is not a beneficiary.

A beneficiary of life insurance proceeds is not considered a beneficiary for the §318 estate attribution rule purposes. This is because this is not a property subject to administration by the executor.

Similarly, an executor or administrator is usually not a beneficiary simply by virtue of occupying either of these positions. The main exception to this rule is a situation where an executor or administrator is otherwise considered a beneficiary.

Finally, a residuary testamentary trust presents a very interesting and complex issue. Under Rev. Rul. 67-24, it may be treated as a beneficiary of an estate before the residue of the estate is actually transferred to it. Moreover, it appears that such a trust (in that case, it was an unfunded testamentary trust) needs to worry about the §318(a)(3)(B) trust attribution rules.

§318 Estate Beneficiary Definition: Cessation of Beneficiary Status

It is important to note that §318 estate attribution rules cease to operate with respect to a person who stops being a beneficiary. See Tres. Reg. §1.318-3(a). There is an exception to this rule though: pursuant to Rev. Rul. 60-18, a residuary legatee does not stop being a beneficiary until the estate is closed. “Residual legatee” is a person named in a will to receive any residue left in an estate after the bequests of specific items are made.

When does a person stop being a beneficiary for the purposes of §318? Treas. Reg. Reg. §1.318-3(a) sets forth the following criteria that must be met for a person to no longer be considered a beneficiary: (a) the person has received all property to which he is entitled; (b) ”when he no longer has a claim against the estate arising out of having been a beneficiary”; and (c) “when there is only a remote possibility that it will be necessary for the estate to seek the return of property or to seek payment from him by contribution or otherwise to satisfy claims against the estate or expenses of administration”.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With US International Business Tax Law

If you have questions concerning US business tax in general and US international business tax law specifically, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help. We are a highly-experienced tax law firm that specializes in US international tax law, including offshore voluntary disclosures, US international tax compliance for businesses and individuals and US international tax planning.

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures: Eligibility Requirements

/in , /by

One of the most significant changes introduced by the 2014 update to the voluntary disclosure structure is the unprecedented introduction of the streamlined voluntary disclosure option to the U.S. taxpayers who reside in the United States – the so called, Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures. The introduction of the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures means that the IRS finally recognized that there is a very large number of U.S. taxpayers who were non-willful with respect to their inability to comply with numerous obscure complex requirements of U.S. tax laws. They now have a new official option to deal with their situation.

Since the new option of the participation in the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures is somewhat important to the voluntary disclosure, I would like to focus this short article on the general eligibility requirements for the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures.

There are three eligibility requirements that must be met in order be able to utilize the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures. First, the taxpayer must be a U.S. citizen, U.S. lawful permanent resident, or he must have met the substantial presence test.

The substantial presence test is outlined in 26 U.S.C. 7701(b)(3). Under 26 U.S.C. §7701(b)(3), an individual meets the substantial presence test if the sum of the number of days on which such individual was present in the United States during the current year and the 2 preceding calendar years (when multiplied by the applicable multiplier) equals or exceeds 183 days.

The second requirement is critical to the participation in the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures – taxpayer’s violations of the applicable U.S. tax requirements must be non-willful. The failures to report the income from a foreign financial asset, pay tax as required by U.S. law, file an FBAR (FinCEN Form 114, previously Form TD F 90-22.1) with respect to a foreign financial account, and file other international information returns (such as Forms 3520, 3520-A, 5471, 5472, 8938, 926, and 8621) should have been non-willful. If the failure to file the FBAR and any other information returns was willful, the participation in the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures is not likely to be possible.

Finally, the third eligibility requirement for the participation in the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedure is that the participating taxpayer is not subject to an IRS civil examination or an IRS criminal investigation, irrespective of the examination is related to undisclosed foreign financial assets or involves any of the years subject to the voluntary disclosure. In either case, the taxpayer will not be eligible to use the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedure.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Legal Help With Your Offshore Voluntary Disclosure

If you have undisclosed foreign accounts or any other offshore assets, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional legal help. Our experienced international tax law firm will thoroughly analyze your case, estimate your current FBAR penalty exposure, and determine your eligibility for the available voluntary disclosure options, including the 2014 OVDP (now closed) Streamlined procedures and the Modified Voluntary Disclosure.

Contact Us to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation.